Marvin JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOCAL 3 IBEW, Seagirt Health Related Facility, St. Johns Hospital, Far Rockaway, Creed Moor, Elmhurst Hospital, Penisula National Bank, Penisula Hospital, Green Bus Line, Jamaica Bus Line, Metropolitan Transit Authority, Wave Crest Gardens, Bellvue Hospital, Dans Supreme Supermarket, ABC Channel 7, Law Firm of Lawrence Lieberman, YMCA Flushing, Jamaica, Department of Motor Vehicles, Queens County Bar Association, New York City Board of Education, Dept. of Probation, Dept. of Parole, JCAP, SPS Security Guard, Traffic Moving Storage, Wave Crest Garden, Defendants, New York City Fire Department, The City of New York, State of New York, Police Department of the City of New York, United States Customs Service, FBI, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 00-6037.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 16, 2001.
*91Brooklyn, NY, pro se.
Leonard Koerner, Corporation Counsel’s Office, City of New York, New York, NY, for appellees, New York City Fire Department, New York City Police Department, and City of New York.
Michael S. Belohlavek, Attorney General’s Office, State of New York, New York, NY, for appellee, State of New York.
Deborah Zwany, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY, for appellees, United States Customs Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Present MESKILL, PARKER, KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.
SUMMARY ORDER
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the decision of said District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff-Appellant Marvin Johnson appeals from the February 8, 2000 memorandum and order of the district court dismissing his complaint sua sponte without prejudice. In the complaint, Johnson alleged that defendants committed various acts which violated his rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
We affirm for substantially the same reasons as set forth in the district court’s memorandum and order. See Johnson v. Fire Dep’t of New York, No. 99 CV 7624(SJ), slip op. at 1-3 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 8, 2000).
For the reasons set forth above, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.